It's the Guns

a reply to: chr0naut

Look, we know you hate guns, and you would make up any excuse to force the people of the U.S. to give up our right to bear arms, but to be quite frank, you can stuff all your beliefs where the sun don't shine. Just because you "believe" there is no reason for Americans to be arm doesn't equal to us having to give up such a right because you want to force us to do so.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: chr0naut

And you love every one of those conflicts, as the authoritarian you are.

There are literally millions of veterans whom are now civilians and are armed. The armed populace is the only thing which has slowed down left-wing authoritarianism.

That is some delusional claptrap right there.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


That is some delusional claptrap right there.

Well, it is my right to hold my own "delusional claptrap", but it isn't your right to force your own delusional claptrap on me or anyone else. Capish?

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: chr0naut

I see your instances and raise you Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Now back to your lane.

Just because, they don't win away games, doesn't negate my argument, because they have always won on home turf

a reply to: chr0naut

And i raise to you that every left-wing country which disarmed the people, including nazi Germany, made most of the people of those countries into slaves and starved, murdered, and imprisoned millions of people.

Heck, for the British the colonists were almost slaves that had to do the bidding of England. Or do you conveniently ignore that fact in your claim that "Britain abolished slavery first?"

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: chr0naut

And you love every one of those conflicts, as the authoritarian you are.

Authoritarianism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As I am not a government, the word doesn't really apply. The current US government, however, fits the definition. Especially considering the way Trumps EO's keep being rejected as unconstitutional.

There are literally millions of veterans whom are now civilians and are armed. The armed populace is the only thing which has slowed down left-wing authoritarianism.

The Bonus Army conflict was specifically the US government against US veterans. It strongly supports my argument.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Nobody is trying to stop you having your delusions, that's your paranoia talking.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: chr0naut

Look, we know you hate guns, and you would make up any excuse to force the people of the U.S. to give up our right to bear arms, but to be quite frank, you can stuff all your beliefs where the sun don't shine. Just because you "believe" there is no reason for Americans to be arm doesn't equal to us having to give up such a right because you want to force us to do so.

I'm not forcing anyone, nor can I. I am trying to debate rationally.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: chr0naut

And i raise to you that every left-wing country which disarmed the people, including nazi Germany,

The Nazi's were extreme right wing, like the Italian Fascists, whom they emulated. We have gone through this before.

And the Nazi's only disarmed their political opponents. The laws which placed limits on guns were implemented by previous governments. The Nazi's also added statutes that specifically allowed guns to be owned and carried by members of the Nazi Party.

I suppose you deny the Holocaust, too - it is a very right-wing thing to do.

made most of the people of those countries into slaves and starved, murdered, and imprisoned millions of people.

What, like the US has?

Heck, for the British the colonists were almost slaves that had to do the bidding of England. Or do you conveniently ignore that fact in your claim that "Britain abolished slavery first?"

Britain was months away by sailing ship voyage in the 1700's. They hardly had 'day to day' control over the US.

Also, after independence, you were still under British Common Law (and still are today). Common law, United States From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

... and your whole wars of independence were really quite a pointless waste of life as Britain was giving up colonies left right and center, without revolution or bloodshed. List of countries that have gained independence from the United Kingdom From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“I’m not gonna say that there’s no connection, but every other country on the planet has social media, video games, online harassment, hate groups, crime, and mental health issues.

So take the gunz.

Take due process, and EFF civil liberty for a false equivalence.

Every other country doesn't have our Bill of Rights.

That clearly spell it out in the second.

The fourth, and last but not least.

The GD 14th amendment.

Don't like gunz.

Don't give a eff.

Don't buy one.

Don't INFRINGE,DENY,DISPARAGE the RIGHTS of every single person in this country because we're ALL supposedly guilty until proven innocent, and IF the usual suspects had their way.

We'd live in an effin police state where only the STATE has a means of protection.

So as I have said in many of these threads. I live in California. I am a gun owner.......

As with everything these days we have become polarized into an extreme right and left viewpoint with nothing to bridge the divide.

A common sense middle ground IMHO:

Every two years you reapply for a gun permit much like I do for my nursing license. At that time you will show evidence of ongoing education (25 hours for nurses) but say an online safety class. At that time a background check for routine stuff will be performed at a nominal cost (I pay 400+ for my RN license but this should be way cheaper)

CLEAR laws. This nonsense about this feature and that feature. I know you think my Noveske Recon looks evil but I can
guarantee my Ruger Scout is way way more deadly. Non gun people keep making laws about stuff they do not understand.

REQUIRE safe storage in the home

You have to apply for a permit before a gun purchase none of this trade show stuff. That would be the waiting period many of us deal with now.

This could in many ways satisfy those in the middle.

originally posted by: chr0naut
...
As I am not a government, the word doesn't really apply. The current US government, however, fits the definition. Especially considering the way Trumps EO's keep being rejected as unconstitutional.

ROFLMAO... You mean the edicts made by LIBERAL judges whom don't care for the U.S. Constitution?...

BTW, you better look up what has happened to those EO's these days, as other judges argued they are Constitutional and within the right of the POTUS to make.

originally posted by: chr0naut
The Bonus Army conflict was specifically the US government against US veterans. It strongly supports my argument.

Again, we don't give a crap what you think. You will use any and every argument to force your view on the U.S. We have our own arguments and could post how those people who essentially fought for their freedom kept it. To make case in point you forget that the majority of colonists in the U.S. were not military personnel and fought against a well trained army and won. We only need to present one argument in our favor as a reason to keep our right to bear arms, and there are many more. Including the fact that it is a RIGTH that shall not be infringed upon.

Even the pacifist known as Ghandi wrote in his own autobiography, and I quote:

Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.

www.quotes.net...

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: chr0naut

I see your instances and raise you Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Now back to your lane.

Just because, they don't win away games, doesn't negate my argument, because they have always won on home turf

Your argument is bull#.

You cannot control an armed population with jets and tanks. You need people for that. Unless the government is willing to completely flatten whole US cities, which they won't do because they need the infrastructure.

The US is orders of magnitude larger than any country we have invaded. The military and police forces cannot hold all of that territory without significant losses to insurgent activities.

With our AR15s, millions of trained veterans, police and military that would refuse to side against the people, you would bear witness the deadliest and most complex insurgency in history.

Stay. In. Your. Lane.

a reply to: FredT

Having a "permit" would not make the "right to own and bear arms" a right, but a privilege that has to be paid. You don't pay for "rights." You can be a gun owner all you want, but you seem to be claiming that anyone whom doesn't agree with you on implementing more restrictions on a RIGHT must be a "right-wing extremist."

It can be argued that there are probably millions of gun owners who live almost in poverty, do they have no right to bear arms? Forcing a permit would take away a RIGHT from those people who cannot afford such permits. And again, do you not understand what shall not be infringed means?

There are already over 20,000 state and federal gun control laws and it's obvious they don't work simply because CRIMINALS don't abide by the law.

a reply to: projectvxn

Something like 22.5 million veterans, and just over 9 million sq kilometers of land, I would take the insurgency and cheerfully give points to the fed in that game.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: FredT

Having a "permit" would not make the "right to own and bear arms" a right, but a privilege that has to be paid. You don't pay for "rights."

I'm pretty sure their not just handing guns out for free over there. So yeah, you do have to pay for your right.

Nothing comes for free in this world... not even "rights".

a reply to: Irishhaf

Yep..

I'm one of them too.

The mistake that gun grabbers make is that they believe it's about the guns. It isn't. It is about securing liberty for our posterity.

I'll die for that. Dying was in my job description as a soldier, is it in theirs? I wonder if they're willing to die for their cause?

a reply to: FredT

BTW, a "permit" would also require "gun registration," which is unConstitutional. Gun registration has been used dozens and dozens of times to take away firearms from people.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

I'm pretty sure their not just handing guns out for free over there. So yeah, you do have to pay for your right.

Nothing comes for free in this world... not even "rights".

Yet buying a gun is a one time fee because it is an object. Permits require "gun registration" which is unConstitutional, and also requires frequent payments.

It can also be argued that to put in writing your free speech you must pay for a pen/pencil, and paper.

a reply to: projectvxn

Right there with you, heck the modern vets in my opinion wouldn't even be the real danger... the old horses from Vietnam, turn that knowledge lose and teach their grandkids, or kids how to truly turn the screws. *shudders*


Never ever ever mess with an old soldier that has seen the face of hell, go after their kids or grand kids to take their constitutional right, nothing but danger coming out of that.